Oppenheimer

Court of Claims

Oppenheimer

194 Ct. Cl. 1024, 1971 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 159, 1971 WL 4125

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedApril 2, 1971

DocketNo. 47-70

StatusPublished

This text of 194 Ct. Cl. 1024 (Oppenheimer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Oppenheimer, 194 Ct. Cl. 1024, 1971 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 159, 1971 WL 4125 (cc 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Plaintiff, a World War II veteran, seeks to recover for time lost while being fingerprinted as a preliminary to employment with the Post Office, Los Angeles, California, and also seeks back pay from the time he originally submitted his application for such employment; he further claims the application was wrongfully rejected. This case comes before the court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Upon consideration thereof, together with plaintiff’s opposition thereto, without oral argument, the court concludes that the decision of the Civil Service Commission’s Board of Appeals and Eeview was neither arbitrary nor capricious and one fully supported by the evidence. On April 2, 1971 the court by order granted defendant’s motion and dismissed the petition. On June 11, 1971 the court denied plaintiff’s motion to set aside summary judgment and order of dismissal.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Plaintiff, a World War II veteran, seeks to recover for time lost while being fingerprinted as a preliminary to employment with the Post Office, Los Angeles, California, and also seeks back pay from the time he originally submitted his application for such employment; he further claims the application was wrongfully rejected. This case comes before the court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Upon consideration thereof, together with plaintiff’s opposition thereto, without oral argument, the court concludes that the decision of the Civil Service Commission’s Board of Appeals and Eeview was neither arbitrary nor capricious and one fully supported by the evidence. On April 2, 1971 the court by order granted defendant’s motion and dismissed the petition. On June 11, 1971 the court denied plaintiff’s motion to set aside summary judgment and order of dismissal.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

194 Ct. Cl. 1024, 1971 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 159, 1971 WL 4125, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oppenheimer-cc-1971.